Case Law Details
Mercury Car Rentals Pvt. Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata)
During the course of assessment proceeding, the AO observed that assessee failed to reconcile interest income to the extent of Rs.67,939/- with its books of accounts and therefore added back the said amount as undisclosed interest income of the appellant as shown in the Form 26AS.
On Appeal ITAT held that based on 26AS alone no additions can be made. This can at best be a starting point for necessary verification but it cannot, on standalone basis, justify the impugned addition. I therefore consider it appropriate to remit the matter to the file of the AO strictly for the limited purpose of verifying the information. In case, he can find any independent evidence for the relevant AY 2012-13 that the appellant had actually received the impugned interest income, then only he can bring the same to tax. It is made clear that the onus will be on the AO to bring on record independent evidence after making enquiries from the payees and that the assessee cannot be expected to discharge the impossible burden of proving a negative i.e., that the assessee did not receive such interest income.With these observations, and for the limited purposes as set out in the foregoing, the matter stands restored to the file of the Assessing Officer. Needless to add that any material found adverse to the assessee, will have to be confronted to the assessee by the AO and in that case the AO shall pass a fresh speaking order after giving due and fair opportunity of hearing to the assessee. This ground accordingly stand allowed for statistical purposes.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGEMENT
This appeal has been preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata [‘Ld. CIT(A)] dated 11.04.2018 for the Assessment Year 2012-13.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
